Originally Posted by eamus
Actually there is good precedent to suggest the situation is considerably worse than that. You can take the majority view which is that the ticket is an offer to carry the passenger on certain terms and conditions (including a sweeping exemption to the effect that even though we will try to carry you from A to B, we really don't have to if we don't want to). You accept that term when you accept the ticket. Or you could take the minority view which is that the ticket is a handy piece of paper, but since the airline hasn't really contracted to actually do anything because of the exemption clause, there is no contract formed by the ticket. Either way the plane may very well be leaving without you and you'd better cross your fingers and hope the QP is open. As for compensation QF contracts to offer you only what the law requires they offer. If your flight is to/from the USA then you get some love courtesy of FAA requirements. They may offer better than the legal requirements, but don't hold your breath waiting. Your other option of course is to buy travel insurance.
Are there no lawyers fighting for passangers right!
Or is there no law, which makes QANTAS binding to an concrete contract?
Which kind of majority view is it , seeing the airline having all rights and the Passangers none?
Holding a DONEW4 origing in Cairo and issued on AA documents , I hope my rights are better than domestic QF tickets issued downunder!
And for me it is a big difference if a flight is canceled due to weather conditions , where the airline has no fault; or if they have tecnical problems, and do not hold any aircraft in reserve ( which is clearly their risk ) ! Or overselling just to meet a higher yiield is clearly airlines risk ! I would post an nice article in major newspapers if QANTAS would kick me in my ars like that; and hope many will do so, may be then they consider to be a litle more customer friendly.
excuse my bad english!
